Blame perp for killing — not court

Here's a secret. Hundreds of men with records similar to that of accused killer Jared Remy pass through the court system every year. But they never make the news because they don't kill their wives or girlfriends.

"In the vast majority of these cases, nothing happens," said retired District Court Judge Paul Waickowski. "I'm not sure what else could have been done here."

Regardless, the cottage industry of blaming the system is in full flower this week, perhaps because it's more satisfying than facing the truth: The courts do their best, but they can't protect everyone.

The Jared Remy case is the worst nightmare of every judge and prosecutor. Arrested Aug. 13 after his girlfriend told Waltham police that he slammed her into a mirror, he was released without bail at his arraignment Aug. 14. The next day, he allegedly stabbed and killed Jennifer Martel in the home they shared with their 4-year-old daughter.

It was a vicious crime, and widespread criticism is aimed at Middlesex District Attorney Marian T. Ryan, whose office neither requested bail for Remy nor asked for a dangerousness hearing. How can that be, we ask? Remy has a history of domestic abuse. Why was nothing done to protect this woman?

"The failure of prosecutors to request such a hearing or at least request high bail at arraignment hangs over this case," reads an editorial this week in The Boston Globe, which added, "Red flags were everywhere."

It would seem so, especially in hindsight, unless you examine the facts. Remy's girlfriend didn't attend his arraignment and told prosecutors she didn't want them to extend the restraining order issued after his arrest. She wasn't seriously injured; an officer found no marks on her head and she declined medical treatment.

Also, Remy's previous charges of domestic violence were at least eight years old, and there was no documented history of abuse in his relationship with Martel. As for bail, it's intended to insure a defendant's appearance in court.

In other words, this was a routine case. Until it wasn't. And while the courts have many tools at their disposal, crystal balls aren't among them.

Lawyers and judges I interviewed this week said they were frustrated by the outrage leveled at the justice system. They noted that domestic cases overwhelm the courts, that judges walk a fine line when alleged victims don't wish to pursue cases, and that restraining orders are routinely abused.

One sitting district court judge, who asked not be named because judges aren't authorized to speak with the media, said domestic violence cases pose tough challenges.

"This is the stuff that keeps us up at night," the judge said. "People increasingly look to the court to solve all of their problems. It's an unrealistic expectation. We can't predict what people are going to do. But the system does its very best."

Asked who should be blamed for the murder of Martel, defense lawyer Louis Aloise said, "The defendant. I don't think the system failed this woman."

Domestic violence prevention requires a multi-pronged approach, and we shouldn't fault victims who won't pursue cases because of fear or lack of resources. Attorney General Martha Coakley wants to review domestic violence laws, which is a good idea.

A bad idea is to engage in the pointless exercise of assigning blame.

"When we have a tragedy, we tend to politicize it," said District Attorney Joseph D. Early Jr. "Everyone agrees that they'd rather have this case go a different way. Do I think the system works? Yes. Can it be better? Yes. Now is the right time to redouble our efforts and make sure it doesn't happen again."